Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 F.2d 393 - Buckner v. Hudspeth

Buckner v. Hudspeth’s Empirical Analysis

105 F.2d 393 · 1939

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
October 1992
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently October 1992

18 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

901939194019501960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Williams v. United States · Prussian v. United States · United States v. Abel Turner · Ex parte Hibbs · Meldrum v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * * to constitute forgery the name alleged to be forged need not be that of any person in existence. It may be wholly fictitious if the instrument is (made with intent to defraud and shows on its face that it has sufficient efficacy to enable it to be used to the injury of another.” 6”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.